The labor Force ““0”’

NATIONAL CENTER For HEALTH STATISTICS

VITAL and HEALTH STATISTICS

DATA FROM THE NATIONAL HEALTH SURVEY

OV*$’W disability among persons in Qf@@$&ts$~~

?WMc @O

The labor Force ““0”’

by employment status

United States

^�

July 1961-June1962

Selected statistics on I imitation of activity and days of restricted activity and bed disability for the total labor force, by age, sex, family income, employment status, occupation, and industry.

Based on data cot Iected in household interviews during July 1961 -June 1962.

Washington, D.C. March 1964

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH, EDUCATION , AND WELFARE Public Health Service

Anthony J. Celebrezze Luther L. Terry

Secretary Surgeon Genera I

. . ,,.. ~ ,.. .

1 I

See inside of back cover for catalog card.

Public Health Service Publication No. 1000-Series 1O-NO. 7

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20-!02 - Price 40 cents

NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS

Forrest E. Linder, Ph. D., Director Theodore D. Woolsey, Deputy Director Oswald K. Sagen, Ph. D., Assistant Director

(for Professional Relations) Walt R. Simmons, M. A., Statistical Advisor Alice M. Waterhouse, M. D., Medical Advisor

James E. Kelly, D.D.S., Dental Advisor Louis R. Stolcis, M.A., Executive Officer

DIVISION OF HEALTH INTERVIEW STATISTICS Philip S. Lawrence, SC.D., Chief

COOPERATION OF THE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Under the legislation establishing the National Health Survey, the Public Health Service is authorized to use, insofar as possible, the services or facilities of other Federal, State, or private agen­

cies.

In accordance with specifications established by the National Health Survey, the Bureau of the Census, under a contractual arrangement, participates in most aspects of survey planning, selects the sample, collects the data, and carries out certain parts of the statistical processing.

Public Health Service Publication No. 1000-Series 1O-NO. 7

---

---

---

--- ---

--- --- ---

---

--- ---

--- ---

---

---

---

--- --- --- --- ---

---

---

—

CONTENTS

Selected Findings

Source and Limitations of Data

Disabilityin the Labor Force

By Sex--- By Age and Sex--- By Income

By @pupation ByIndustry

Dtailed Tables

Appendix 1. Technical Notes on Methods Background oflhis Report

Statistical Design of theHealth Interview Survey - General Qualifications

Reliability of Estimates

Guide to Use of Relative Standard Error Charts

Appendix 11. Definitions of Certain Terms Used in This Report

Terms Relating to Employment Status TermsRelating to Chronic Conditions Terms Relating to Disability

Long-Term Disability

Terms Relating to Demographic Characteristics

Appendix HI. Questionnaire

Page

1

2

3 3 5 6 7 8

11

39 39 39

40 40 42

47 47 47 47 47 48 50

--- --- ---

---

--- SYMBOLS

Data not available

Category not applicable . . .

Quantity zero -

Quantity more than Obutless than0.05---- 0.0 Figure doesnot meet standards of

reliabilityor precision *

DISABILITY AMONG PERSONS IN

THE LABOR FORCE

BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS

SELECTED FINDINGS

Data collected in the Health Interview Survey during the period from July 1961 through June

1‘%2 indicate that persons in the labor force averaged 12.3 days on which they had to redu”ce their usual activities (referred to in the Survey as twstricted-activit y days). Included in this number were 4.2 days which necessitated staying in bed (referred to as bed-disability days). Employed persons had 11.7 restricted-activity days, of which 4,1 were bed-disability days; unemployed persons had 21.6 restricted-activity days, of which 6.9 were bed-disability days.

As family income increased, restricted-ac­

tivity days decreased, but the decrease in the rate wtis sharper among the employed than among the unemployed. The currently employed persons with o family income under $2,000 during the year had 17.6 restricted-activity days, whereas the un­

employed with the same income had 25.4 days.

Employed persons with a family income over

$7,000 had 10.7 restricted-activity days; the unemployed with the same income had 21.2 days.

About 48 percent of the persons in the labor force reported no chronic conditions. An addition­

al 41.1 percent, although reporting one or more chronic conditions, had no resulting limitation of sctivity. Therefore, 10.9 percent of persons in the labor force reported chronic conditions and limitations of activity associated with these

Th/s report was prepared by Carolanne H. Hoffmann of the Di­

vision of Health Interview Statistics.

conditions; 7.3 percent were limited in their abil­

ity to carry on their major activity, which refers in general to limitation in amount or kind of work.

The remaining 3.6 percent were limited in other ways, such as recreational, social, and civic interests.

The percent of persons with one or more chronic conditions was about the same for the employed as for the unemployed, however, there was a higher percent of the unemployed group with activity limitation (16.7 percent) than of the employed (10. 5 percent).

Disability measured in terms of restricted- activity and bed-disability days was appreciably higher among the unemployed than among the em­

ployed regardless of the presence of chronic con­

ditions or the degree of activity limitation. The differential by employment status was most noticeable among persons with limitation affecting their major activity.

As would be expected, the percent of the labor force with one or more chronic conditions “ increased with age, as did the average number of restricted-activity days per person. The un­

employed in each age group had more restricted- activity days per person regardless of the degree of activity limitation.

Although males in the labor force experienced more activity limitation than females, they tended to have fewer chronic conditions. Males under 45 years of age had fewer restricted-activity days than females; however, both sexes had approxi­

mate y the same number of restricted-activity days per person over 45 years.

Occupational and industrial classifications of persons in the labor force showed high rates of chronic illness and limitations among private

1

household workers andlowrates for clerical and salesworkers. There were also differences inthe average number of disability days experienced per person between different occupation and in­

dustry groups, but the unemployed, with few ex­

ceptions, had higher rates of disability days than the employed in each industrial and occupational class.

SOURCE AND LIMITATIONS OF DATA

Information contained in this publication is derived from household interviews conducted by the Health Interview Survey of the National Center for Health Statistics in cooperation with the U.S.

Bureau of the Census. The data are from a prob­

ability sample of the civilian, noninstitutional population of the United States. The sample is so designed that interviews are conducted during every week of the year. During the period from July 1961-June 1962, the sample was composed of approximately 38,000 households, containing about 125,000 persons living at the time of the interview.

A description of the design of the survey, methods used in estimation, and general qualifica­

tions of the data obtained from surveys is pre­

sented in Appendix I. Since estimates shown in this report are based on a sample of the population rather than on the entire population, they are subject to sampling error. Therefore, particular attention should be paid to the section entitled

“Reliability of Estimates. ” Sampling errors for most of the estimates are of a relatively low magnitude. However, where an estimated number or the numerator or denominator of a rate or percentage is small, the sampling error may be high. Furthermore some tables contain small numbers which have sampling e~rors which are so large that the single number has no significance alone, yet has been exhibited because along with the other numbers it forms a pattern which is significant. Charts of relative sampling errors and instructions for their use are shown in Appendix I,

The sections of the survey questionnaire, shown in Appendix III, that apply directly to data presented in this report include the illness-recall questions (8-12) and the check lists of chronic

conditions and impairments used with questions 13 and 14. Conditions elicited by these questions, together with the additional diagnostic detail recorded in table I (Cols. d-l-d-5), make it possible to identify persons with one or more chronic conditions. The varying degrees of activit y limitation due to c@onic conditions are described on Cards D and E of the questionnaire, Information on disability days for individuals is obtained from an unduplicated count of restricted-activity and bed-disability days due to illness recorded in table I (Cols. e-h).

Questions relating to industry and occupation of the sampled persons were asked for the first time by the Health Interview Survey during the year covered by this report (question 21 of the questionnaire, Appendix III). These questions applied only to those persons considered to be in the labor force (see Appendix II for definition).

The industry and occupation reported by the respondent for each person in the labor force was assigned to a code category included in the

Classified Index of Occupations and Industries * used for the 1960 Decennial Census. The clas­

sifications in this index are an adaptation of the classifications in the Standard Industrial Clas­

sification (SIC). For the purposes of this report, the classifications of industries and occupations have been condensed further. Appendix II shows the industry and occupation groupings used, as well as the corresponding codes of the Bureau of the Census and the Standard Industrial Clas­

sification.

“Currently employed” persons, in this pub­

lication, are persons 17 years of age and over who worked at any time during the 2 weeks prior to the week of interview, or those who did not work, but had a job or business and were not on layoff or looking for work. This definition is slightly different from that used for “Currently employed” in earlier publications from the Health Interview Survey. This change is explained in de- tail in Appendix II.

lu.s. BUrCaUof the CCIISUS, 1960 Census population, Clussi­

/ied Index of Occupations .nd industries, U.S. Govemmcnt Ptinting Office, Washington, D. C., 1960.

2

Persons whowere networking, even though havinga job, if on layoff onlooking for work, had been classified among the currently employed in previous reports based on health interview data.

However, since this group of approximately 500,000 is in most cases actually unemployed and tends to have health characteristics similar to the unemployed population, it will hereafter be in­

cluded in the “Unemployed” category. In this report, estimates for the currently employed population including and excluding this segment (designated as “old” and “new” definition, respec­

tively) are shown in the detailed tables. Since this group represents less than 1 percent of the total estimate when it is included in the currently employed population, rates are only slightly affected by the change. The minimal differences shown in the detailed tables indicate that rates computed on the currently employed population as defined in earlier publications (e.g., Series B, No. 41, Series C, No. 7, and Series 10, No. 4) are sufficiently accurate for general use.

In the Health Interview Survey the category unemployed includes persons 17 years and over who, during the 2-week period prior to interview, did not work or had no job or business but

were

looking for work, and those who had a job but were on layoff or” looking for work.

Data presented in this report are not intended as official labor force estimates. Emphasi< on illness and disability required procedures for measuring employment status which resulted in estimates similar to, but not precisely the same as, official employment data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For example, this report includes only persons 17 years of age or older, whereas official labor force estimates include persons 14 years of age or olde~. Also, the Health Interview Survey employs a 2-week- reference period—that is, a person who worked at any time during a 2-week period was included among the currently employed-whereas official employment data are based on a 1- week-reference period. Furthermore, official figures include un­

paid family workers only if they worked 15 hours or more during the week, while the Health Inter- view does not distinguish between persons who work more or less than 15 hours per week. Be-

cause the data included here were collected weekly throughout the year and cumulated for the year, the estimates refer to average employment and unemployment during July 1961-June 1962, while official estimates are obtained for discrete points of time during the year. For official labor force estimates and definitions, see

Employment and Earnings,

published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor.

DISABILITY IN THE LABOR FORCE The Health Interview Survey measures two aspects of disability due to disease. The first, long-term disability, describes the inability of a person to carry on all or part of his regular activities, designated as limitation of activity.

The other aspect of disability refers to com­

paratively short periods of reduced activity de- scribed as days of restricted activity or bed disability. Therefore, the concept of disability due to illness or injury expressed in terms of days differs from the concept of activity limitation in that the latter presents a qualitative rather than a quantitative measure of disability. Moreover, disability days may result from acute as well as chronic conditions.

In this report both aspects of disability in the labor force have been considered (1) by describing the comparative amount of chronic limitation among employed and unemployed persons, and (2) by measuring the rate of disability days for employed and unemployed persons.

By Sex

During the period July 1961-June 1962, the average number of persons in the labor force, as defined in the Health Interview Survey, was 71,383,000. Of this number, approximately

3,622,000, on the basis of their employment status during the 2-week period prior to interview, were classified as unemployed.

In the total labor force there was no difference in the distribution of employed and unemployed persons with respect to reporting of the presence or absence of chronic conditions. However, the unemployed had a higher rate of activity limitation

3

--- ---

--- due to chronic illness, particularly in relation to limitation affecting major activity (table 1).

Among males,

7.9

percent of those currently employed had limitation affecting major activity as compared with 15.5 percent for those currently unemployed. comparable rates among females were 5.2 and 8.5 percent for the currently employed and the currently unemployed. The pro- portion of those with limitation not affecting major activity was lower among the unemployed than among the employed for males, but for females the rate of this kind of limitation was higher in the unemployed group. Some part of the high percentage of unemployed females who were limited, but not in major activity, may be due to the data collection procedure. About one-fifth of the women in the labor force reported that their usual activity during the past 12 months had been keeping house (table A). These women were asked about limitation of activity in terms of their ability to keep house rather than in terms of their ability to work. Therefore, those women who said they were “able to keep house but limited in the amount or kind of other activities” were tabulated as having a “limitation, but not affecting major activity, ” resulting in a disproportionately high number of women in this category, partic­

ularly among those who were unemployed (6.4 percent among women as compared with 2.6 percent among men).

Persons in the labor force had a total of approximately 874 million restricted-activity

days during the period July 1961-June 1962, of which about 303 million were days of bed dis­

ability. This represents an average of 12,3 restricted-activity and 4.2 bed-disability days per person (tables 2 and 3). A day of restricted activity is defined in the survey as a day when a person cuts down on his usual activities for the whole of that day because of illness or injury. A day spent in bed because of illness also is designated as a day of restricted activity. A day of bed disability is defined as a day during which a person spent all or most of the day in bed be- cause of an illness or an injury. A day spent in a hospital is considered a day of bed disability even if the person was not actually in bed.

The unemployed population had a larger number of restricted-activity and bed-disability days per person than did employed workers for each degree of activi~ limitation. The average number of disability days was consistently higher for females than for males, with the average number of days increasing with the extent of limitation.

Rates of current disability according to degree of activity limitation have been abstracted from tables 2 and 3 and are shown in a more consolidated form in table B. From this table it is possible to observe the consistent pattern of disability among males and females according to employment status and degree of chronic limi­

tation.

Table A. Number and percent of females in the labor force whose usual activity during the past year was keeping house, according to employment status: United States, July 1961-June 1962

Usual activity—

Total keeping house

Employment status number in

thousands

.

Percent

Females in labor force 24.645

?

5 484 22 3

Currently employed 23,109 4,694 20.3

Currently unemployed 1,536 790 51.4

4

---

--- --- ---

---

Table B. Number of disability days per person per year,by sex,age, employment status, and degree of activity limitation: United States, July 1961-June 1962

I

Number of disability days per person per year Limitation of activity

All persons Persons with no chronic

conditions

Persons with 1-1-chronic conditions

No Limitation of activity

Limitation—but not affecting major activity--- Limitation-affecting

major activity

By Age

and Sex

Restricted-activity days Bed-disability days

Male Female Male Female

Em- Un- Em- Un- Em- Un- Em- Un­

ployed employed ployed employed ployed employed ployed employed

11.1 20.4 13.1 23.4 3.7 5.8 4.8 8.4

4.0 5.0 4.9 6.9 1.6 2.4 2.0 3.6

17.7 36.3 20.3 36.7 5.8 9.3 7.3 12.2

10.4 15.1 13.5 23.0 3.8 4.8 5.3 9.4

29.9 46.1 48.9 56.9 49.5 76.8 .57.8 87.1

There was a larger percent of unemployed than employed persons with limitations ofactivity in each of the three age groups shownin table4.

The unemployed had not only more frequent limitation of activity due to chronic illness but also more extensive limitations. Even though chronic illness and activity limitations increased with age, the difference in disability between the employed and theunemployed remainedconsistent in each age group.

In the two youngest age groups, 17-24 and 25-44 years, the proportion ofmales with oneor more chronic conditions was approximately the same among the unemployed as among the cur­

rently employed (table 5). However, in the latter age group, unemployed males with a chronic condition had the more extensive limitations (i.e., those affecting major activity). Unemployed males, 45 years of age and over, hadnot onlya

larger percent of persons with extensive limi­

tations but alsoa higher percentwithoneor more chronic conditions thandidthecurrentlyemployed group. In each of the three age groups offemales in the labor force, shown in table 6, unemployed females had a higher proportion of chronic conditions and limitation ofactivitythancurrently employed females.

Unemployed persons in the labor force ex­

perienced more restricted-activity days for all three age groups and for all activity-limitation groups than thecorre spondinggroups ofemployed persons with one exception (table 7). This ex­

ception is the 17-24 yearage group in which the currently employed persons with no chronic con­

ditions had more restricted-activity daysthanthe corresponding unemployed persons. This pattern is also apparent when males and females are considered separately (tables 8and9).Thereason for this exception may be that the unemployed in this group are largely young personswhohavenot

5

121-118 0-64-2

Currently employed

Currsntly unsmploysd IZZl

38.0

32.8

25.9

I7.8

10.8

8.8 ^{9.1 8.9}

Aii!iz

^6.2 17-24 ^A 25-44 45-t

1

17-24 25-44 45 +

years years year. years years years

Figure 7. Number of restricted.activity days per person per yew, by sex, age, and employment status.

yet reported to work; these persons would be expected to have few chronic conditions.

Although the number of restricted-activity days per person was higher among those currently unemployed than among the currently employed in all age-sex groups, the differential between the two employment status groups in- creased with age (fig. 1).

By

Income

A slightly smaller percent of unemployed persons had chronic conditions than employed persons for all family income groups except the

$4,000-6,999 group (table 10). Unemployed per- sons with a chronic condition, however, had a larger percent of their population with more ex­

tensive activity limitations than the corresponding employed population for all family income groups.

In general, unemployed persons had more re­

stricted-activity days than employed persons for each income group irrespective of chronic con-

6

dition and degree of activity limitation (table 11).

‘The rate of restricted-activity days was higher among persons with a family income under

$4,000 than among persons with a family income over $4,000. This was probably due to the fact that the family income groups under $4,000 have a disproportionately high percentage of older people who tend to have more chronic conditions, and thus more restricted-activity days, than a young population (table C). It should not be overlooked, however, that disability may ,cause a reduction of earning power; that is, sickness is both a cause and an effect of low income.

Figure 2 shows that among persons with family incomes under $4,000 the rate of restricted activity for the unemployed was about 1%times the rate for the employed. In higher income groups, restricted-activity days per person were about twice as high for the unemployed as for the em­

ployed persons. This suggests that among the

lower income groups, which contain the largest

proportion of older persons, there tends to be

---

--- --- --- --- --- --

---

---

I I

Table C. Percent distributionof the total labor force, by age according to family income and employment status: United States, July 1961-June 1962

Employment status Age and family income

Total persons in Currently Currently the labor force employed unemployed

All incomes Percent distribution

All ages 100.0 100.0 100.0

17-24--- 16.1 15.2 33.0

25-44--- 43.9 44.4 36.1

45+- 39.9 40.4 30.9

Under $4,000 I

All ages

17-24--- 25-44--- 45-l---

All ages

17-24--- 25-44--- 45+---

less difference between the employed and the unemployed because most older persons have chronic conditions and a high rate of restricted activity regardless of employment status. How- ever, in the income groups over $4,000, which include a relatively higher proportion ofpersons under 45years of age, the employedseemedtobe more differentiated from theunemployedinterms of restricted-activity days.

By

Occupation

In all occupation groups, chronic conditions and serious activity limitations were more prev­

alent for the unemployed than for the employed

100.0 100.0 100.0

20.0 19.0 29.6

36.2 36.1 37.0

43.8 44.8 33.4

100.0 100.0 100.0

14.4 13.7 35.5

48.2 48.6 36.7

37.3 37*7 27.8

(table 12). In the occupation group “Private household workers,” the percentage of workers with a chronic condition was higher than that for any other group, whereas “Laborers (except farm andmine) “reportedthesmallest percentage, excluding “Unknown occupation.” The unknown group includes new workers—persons who were described as having a job to wbichthey hadnot yet reported and who had never been previously employed. The last provision limits this group for the most part to young persons. Because the new workers comprise approximately 50 percent of the “Unknown occupation” category, a rela­

tivelysmall number ofpersons with chroniccon­

ditions would be expected in this category.

7

Currently employed

Currently unemployed Izz

21.2 20.5

I 8.0

Under $2,000 $2,000-3,999 $4,000-6,999 $7,000+

FAMILY INCOME

Figure 2. Number of restricted-activ!ty days per person per year, by family income and employment sti tus.

Unemployed persons had more restricted- activity days than the employed persons in each occupational group (table 13). Within each group, regardless of employment status, the greater or more serious the activity limitation, the greater the number of restricted-activity days. The occupation “Private household workers’’ had the greatest number of restricted-activity days per currently employed persons, whereas the smallest number of restricted-activity days was found in the occupation group “Unknown occupation. ” (This again is probably due to the fact that new workers are included in this group).

Unemployed persons had more bed-disability days for each occupation group, and for all activity limitation categories, than the corresponding employed persons (table 14). For both the em­

ployed and unemployed, the more serious the activity limitation, the larger the number of bed- disability days. Although the sampling error of

the relevant figures is especially high, there is evidence that, in the unemployed population’ ‘Farm laborers” had the highest number of bed-disability days, and the group “Unknown occupation” had the smallest number of bed-disability days. Of the currently employed population, “Private house- hold workers” had the largest number of bed- disability days and again, “Unknown occupation”

had the fewest bed-disability days.

By

Industry

From table 15 it can be noted that there were higher percentages of unemployed persons with chronic conditions and more serious limitations than of the currently employed in each industry group. However, the distribution for either the employed or unemployed, according to the degree of activity limitation, was much the same for all industries except for the “Unknown” category.

The amount of activity limitation was probably

8

lower in this group because of the inclusion of new workers, a category which includes many young persons.

In general, unemployed persons had more restricted-activity days than employed persons in each industry. As the degree of activity limitation increased, so did the differential between the employed and unemployed in terms of restricted-

activity days. In table 16, the major exception to this pattern is found in the “Unknown” industry category in which the trend is reversed. Similar relationships exist for bed disability (table 17).

Table 18 is included to show the basic differences in the distribution of the various population groups by certain demographic char­

acteristics.

000

Table 1.

2,

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8*

9.

10.

11.

DETAILED TABLES

—SEX

Number and percent distribution of all persons in the labor force (17+ years) , by limitation of activity according to sex and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962--- Number of restricted-activity days and number of restricted-activity days per person per year, by limitation of activity, sex, and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962--- Number of bed-disability days and number of bed-disability days per person per year, by limitation of activity, sex, and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962---

—AGE

Number and percent distribution of all persons in the labor force,by limitation of activity according to age and employment status: United States, July 1961- June l962--- Number and percent distribution of males in the labor force, by limitationof activity according to age and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962--- Number and percent distribution of femalesin the labor force, by limitation of activity according to age and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962--- Number of restricted-activity days and number of restricted-activity days per person per year, by limitation of activity, age, and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962--- Number of restricted-activity days and number of restricted-activity days per male per year, by limitation of activity, age, and employment status: United

=es, July 1961-June l962--- Number of restricted-activity days and number of restricted-activity days per female per year, by limitation of activity, age, and employment status: United

~, July 1961-June l962--- FAMILY INCOME

Number and percent distribution of all persons in the labor force (17+ years), by limitation of activity according to family income and employment status:

United States, July 1961-June l962--- Number of restricted-activity days and number of restricted-activity days per person per year,by limitation of activity, family income, and employment status:

United States, July 1961-June l962---

Page

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

24

11

DETAILED TABLES-Continued

Page OCCUPATION

Table 12. Number and percent distribution of all persons in the labor force (17+ years),

~;a;itation of activity according to occupation and employment status: United

> July 1961-June l962--- 26 13. Number of restricted-activity days and number of restricted-activity days per

person per year, by limitation of activity, occupation, and employment status:

United States, July 1961-June l962--- 28 14. Number of bed-disability days and number of bed-disability days per person per

year, by limitation of activity, occupation, and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962--- 30

INDUSTRY

15. Number and percent distribution of all persons in the labor force (17+ years), by limitation of activity according to industry group and employment status:

United States, July 1961-June l962--- 32 16. Number of restricted-activity days and number of restricted-activity days per

person per year, by limitation of activity, industry group, and employment status: United States, July 1961-June 1962--- 34 17. Number of bed-disability days and number of bed-disability days per person per

year, by limitation of activity, industry group, and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962--- 36

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LABOR FORCE

18. Percent distribution of the population 17 years of age and older by demographic characteristic according to labor force and employment status: United States, July 1961-June l962--- 38

---

--- ---

---

---

---

--- --- ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

Table 1. Number end percent distribution of all persons in the labor force (17+ years),by limitation of activity according to sex and employment ststus,l:United States, July 1961-June 1962

~akmebn8& onhou8ehold intitviews of thecivilim, noninstitutional population. Thes.rvey desigm, gene,.l qualifications, andinfommtion onthereliahility oftbeestimates.re given in Appendix I. Definitions oftenns aregivenin Ap~

Currently employed

Total Total Currently

of activity

force force Old _ New employed

_definition definition

II 1 I

Both sexes Number of persona in thousands Percent distribution

All persons 71,38: 68,252 67,762 3,622 100.0 100.0 100.0 — 100.0 P~iar;~with no chronic con-

..---.----..-- _34,31i 32,776 32>570 1,747 48.1 48.0 48.1 48.2 P~er;~with 1+ chronic con-

37,066 35,476 35>192 1,874 51.9 52.0 51.9 51.7 No limitation of activity 29,322 28,251 28,053 1,269 41.1 41.4 41.4 35.0 Limitation-but not affect-

ing,mejor activity 2,55( 2,439 2,402 152 3.6 3.6 3.5 4.2

Limitation-affecting major

activity 5,19C 4,786 4,737 454 7.3 7.0 7.0 12.5

Sex and limitation

in labor Ln labor un-

Q

Allpersons 46,73f 44,!336 44,653 2,085 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Pereona with no chronic con-

ditions 22,82C 21,888 21,759 1,061 48.8 48.7 48.7 50.9

P~er~;~with 1+ chronic con-

23,91t 23,048 22,894 1,024 51.2 51.3 51.3 49.1

No limitation of activity 18,46C 17,925 17,813 647 39.5 39.9 39.9 31.0 Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity 1,594 1,551 1,540 54 3.4 3.5 3.4 2.6

Limitation-affecting major

activity 3,864 3,572 3,540 324 8.3 7.9 7.9 15.5

Female

All persons 24,64! 23,316 23,109 1,536 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

P~i~erg~SwJ.thno chronic con-

ll>49i 10,888 10,810 686 46.7 46.7 46.8 44.7 Pfier~awith 1+ chronic con-

13,14E 12,428 12,298 850 53.3 53.3 53.2 55.3

No limitation of activity 10,86: 10,326 10,240 622 44.1 44.3 44.3 40.5 Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity 96C 888 862 98 3.9 3.8 3.7 6.4

Limitation-affecting major

activity 1,32[ 1,214 1,196 130 5.4 5.2 5.2 8.5

lFordefinitions mdtisc.ssion seepage2 and App.di.IL

NOTE ForoNioitdp opulationestimaks fotmorogeneraluse, see Bureau Of~eCe.s.s repp~on tieoivilim population Oftbe Unikd Stites, in C.ment Fop.lation Repti Se­

ries P-20, P-25, and P-tlW, and Bureau of Labar8t@iatics monthlyrepott, EmploymentandEarnings.

721-17S O- 64-9

---

--- ---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

Table 2. Number of restricted-activity days and number of restricted-activity days per person per year, by limitation of activity, sex, and employment statusl: United Statasz July 1961-June 1962

~atame basedOLI household i.tiwkmwoftheoivilk,.o.hmtit.tioml population. survey Tfie design,$ien.r.l w$dif&$ons, and in fome.tim m the reliability of the ewitmto. are

Sex and limitation of activity

Both saxea All persons

Persons with no chronic con­

ditions--- Parsona with 1+ chronic con­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting msjor

activity

~ All persons

Persons with no chronic con­

ditions--- Peraona with 1+ chronic con­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing msjor activity Limitation—affecting major

activity--- Femsle

All persona--- Persons with no chronic con­

ditions

Persona with 1+ chronic con­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting msjor

activity

given in.4ppmdix I. Definitions ofts-ms a~gijenin A~]

II 1

Number of restricted-activitydaya in thmmanda

874,494 816,309 796,130 —78,364

151,411 143,041 141,354 10,057

723,0S3

1

673,268 654,776 68,307 346,342 330,_18& 322,307 24,035

96,261 90,918 88,192 8,069

280,480 252,167 244,277 36,203

535,984 503,624 493,542 42,442

93,218 89,018 87,897 5,321

442,766 414,605 405,645 37,122 194,152 187,557 184,399 9,753

48,530 46,811 46,040 2,490

200,085 180,237 175,205 24,879

338,510 312,686 302,588 35,922

58,193 54,022 53,457 4,737

280,317 258,663 249,131 31,185 152,190 142,627 137,908 14,282

47,731 44,107 42,151 5,580

80,395 71,930 69,072 11,323

II I I

Number of restricted-activity dsya per person per year 12.3 “

4..4

T

19.5 11.8

37.7

54.0

11.5

4.1

18.5 10.5

30.4

51.8

13.7

5.1

21.3 14.0

49.7

60.6

19.0 18.6

11.7 11.5

37.3 36.7

52.7 51.6

11.2 11.1

4.1 4.0

18.0 17.7

10.5 10.4

30.2 29.9

50.5 49.5

5.0 4.9

20.8 20.3

13.8 13.5

49.7 48.9

59.3 57.8

21.6

5.8

36.4 18.9

53.1

79.7

20.4

5.0

36.3 15.1

46.1

76.8

23.4

6.9

36.7 23.0

56.9

87.1

lFo*defi~itions audtiscussionseepsge2 and AppdixII.

14

---

---

---

---

---

--

---

---

---

--- ---

--- ---

---

---

~

I

Table 3. Number of bed-disabilitydays and number of bed-disability days per person per year, by limitation of activity, sex. and employment statusl: United States, JUIY 1961-June 1962

TheSUW.Ydesign,

[D.W m. based cm household inkvimw of tie c;vilian, nonkfikional population. generd”walifica@% and infonnati.an on the reliability of the estima@s are eivenin A!mendix L De finitions ofterms are@minAppendixfIl

Currently employed Total

Sex and limitation .n labor

Currently

of activity force employedun­

ZiEXEz

Both sexes

Number of bed-disability daya in thousands

Number of bed-disabilitydays per person per yeai -

All persons ~2,976 285,389 277,990 24,986 4.2 4.2 4.1 6.9

P~er:~with no chronic con-

...--- 61,611 57,509 56,564 5,047 1.8 1.8 1.7 2.9 P~i:ern~with 1+ chronic con-

...--- 241>365 227,880 221,426 19,939 6.5 6.4 6.3 10.6 No limitation of activity 130,650 124,712 121,712 8,938 4.5 4.4 4.3 7.0 Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity 27,084 26,138 25,980 * 10.6 10.7 10.8 *

Limitation-affecting major

activity 83,631 77,030 73,734 9,897 16.1 16.1 15.6 21.8

~

All persons 178,355 169,S14 166,267 12,087 3.8 3.8 3.7 5.8

P~ier:8with no chronic con-

...--- 37,029 35,106 34,4s0 2,549 1.6 1.6 1.6 2.4

P&i:er;~with 1+ chronic con­

- 141,326 134,708 131,788 9,538 5.9 5.8 5.8 9.3

...---

No limitation of activity 70,617 68,527 67,508 3,109 3.8 3.8 3.8 4.8 Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity 13,591 13,521 13,521 * 8.5 8.7 8.8 *

Limitation-affecting major

57,118 52,661 50,759 6,359 14.8 14.7 14.3 19.6

activity m

Allpersons 124,621 115*575 111,722 12,899 5.1 5.0 4.8 8&

P~ier:~with no chronic con-

24,582 22,403 22,084 2,498 2.1 2.1 2.0 3.6

P~i&:awi,th 1+ chronic con-

100,039 93,172 89,638 10,401 7.6 7.5 7.3 12.2

No limitation of activity 60,034 56,185 54,204 5,829 5.5 5.4 5.3 9.4 Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity 13,493 12,617 12,459 * 14.1 14.2 14.5 *

Limitation-affecting major

activity 26,512 24,370 22,975 3,537 20.0 20.1 19.2 27.2

lFordefiniUons anddi80u8sion 8eep.ge2 and Appendix If.

15

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

Table 4. Number and percent distribution of all persona in the labor force, by limitation of activity according to age and emulovment statusl: United Statas. JUIV 1961-June 1962

[D& am breed O. household intarviw.s d the civilian; ma~instit.timd PQp.ktion. Themuwy’des&,.&ml wdi;;;t$ns, andinfammtimcmthereliability oftheestinwns U.

givenin Appendix I. Definitions of terms aremvenin ADD

Currently employed Total

Age and limitation in labor

Currently of activity un­

force 014 New employed

definition definition

Number of all uersans in the labor force

All agea-17+ veara in thousands Percent distribution

All persons 71,383 68,252 67,762 3,622 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Persons with no chronic con­

ditions 34,317 32,776 32,570 1,747 48.1 48.0 48.1 48.2

Peraotiawith 1+ chranic con­

ditions 37,066 35,476 35,192 1,874 51.9 52.0 51.9 51.7

No limitation of activity 29,323 28,251 28,053 1,269 41.1 41.4 41.4 35.0 Limitation-but not affect­

ing majar activity 2,554 2,439 2,402 152 3.6 3.6 3.5 4.2

Limitation-affecting major

activity 5,190 4,786 4,737 454 7.3 7.0 7.0 12.5

17-24 yeara

All persons 11,518 10,422 10,324 1,194 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Persons with no chronic con­

ditions 7,571 6,871 6,810 76C 65.7 65.9 66.0 63.7

Persons with 1+ cbranic con­

ditions 3,948 3,551 3,514 434 34.3 34.1 34,0 36.3

No limitation of activity 3,468 3,135 3,102 365 30.1 30.1 30.0 30.6

Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity 1s4 159 154 * 1.6 1.5 1.5 *

Limitation-affecting major

Activity 296 257 257 39 2.6 2.5 2.5 3.3

25-44 yeara

All persons 31,369 30,263 30,06C 1,30s 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Persana with no chronic con­

ditions 15,937 15,383 15,301 637 50.8 50.8 50.9 48,7

Persons with 1+ chronic con-

ditions 15,432 14,880 14,759 672 49.2 49.2 49.1 51.3

No limitation of activity 12,972 12,581 12,493 478 41.4 41.6 41.6 36.5

Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity S92 855 s4~ 4~ 2.8 2.8 2.8 3.7

Limitation-affecting major

activity 1,568 1,444 1,423 14: 5.0 4.8 4.7 11.1

45+ yeara

All persons 28,496 27,566 27,377 1,118 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Persons with no chranic con­

ditions 10>809 10,521 10,458 350 37.9 38.2 38.2 31,3

Persons with 1+ chronic can­

ditiona 17,687 17,044 16,919 768 62.1 61.8 61.8 68.7

No limitation of activity 12,883 12,534 12,458 425 45.2 45.5 45.5 38.0 Limitation-but not sffect­

ing major activity 1,478 1,425 1,405 72 5.2 5.2 5.1 6.5

Limitation-affecting major

activity 3,326 3,086 3,057 26S 11.7 11.2 11.2 24.1

1Forde6tition8 anddiscussion soepage2 and Appendix IL

NOTE. For#lcial population eatimaias formorsgeneraf use, see Bursau of the Census repmts ontbe civilian population of the Unitsd States, in(’urrent Population Reporta:%­

ties P-20, P-25, and P-60; and Bureau of Labx.Watistics monthly rapa@ Employmentand Earnings.

16.

---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

--- --- ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

Table 5. Number and percent distribution of- in the labor force, by limitation of activity according to age and em­

ployment statusl: United States, July 1961-June 1962

on h..s.h.ld

@at.am based intmvi.w of the civilian, ncminstit.tiond population. The s.Ney design, g.neral qu.lifiw$ns, and information cm the mliahi]ity of the estimates sre given in Appendix L f)efinitions ofterrns 8regivon inAp

Currently employed

TOta1 Current1S Total

Age and limitation i;o~or un- in labor

of activity Old New employed force

definitic.n definition

Number of malea in the labor force

All ages-17+ years in thousands Percent distribution

All persona -46,738 44,936 44,653 2,085 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

P~i;er;8with no chronic con-

... 22,820 21,888 21,759 1,061 48.8 48.7 48.7 50.9 Persona with 1+ chronic con-

ditions 23,918 23,048 22,894 1,024 51.2 51.3 51.3 49.1

No limitation of activity 18,460 17,925 17,813 647 39.5 39.9 39.9 31.0 Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity 1,594 1,551 1,540 54 3.4 3.5 3.4 2.6

Limitation-affecting major

activity 3,864 3,572 3,540 324 8.3 7.9 7.9 15.5

17-24 veara

All persona 6,703 6,122 6,079 624 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

P~~er;awfth no chrcmic cOn-

4,539 4,141 4,109 430 67.7 67.6 67.6 68.9

Peraone with 1+ chronic con-

ditions 2,164 1,981 1,970 194 32.3 32.4 32.4 31.1

No limitation of activity 1,889 1,730 1,719 170 28.2 28,3 28.3 27.2

Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity 85 78 78 * 1.3 1.3 1.3 *

Limitation—affecting major

activity 189 173 173 * 2.8 2.8 2.8 *

25-44 yeara

All persons 21.,227 20,619 20,495 733 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Paraona with no chronic con-

ditions 11,050 10,707 10,656 394 52.1 51.9 52.0 53.8

Peraona with 1+ chronic ccm-

ditions 10,178 9,912 9,838 339 47.9 48.1 48.0 46.2

No limitation of activity 8,462 8,295 8,241 222 39.9 40.2 40.7 30.3 Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity 573 562 555 * 2.7 2.7 2.7 *

Limitation-affecting major

activity 1>142 1,055 1,042 100 5.4 5.1 5.1 13.6

45t years

All peracms 18,808 18,195 18,079 729 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Persons with nn chronic con-

ditions 7,231 7,040 6,994 237 38.4 38.7 38.7 32.5

P~i~~awith 1+ chronic con-

- 11,577 11,155 11,085 492 61.6 61.3 61.3 67.5

No limitation of activity 8,109 7,899 7,853 256 43.1 43.4 43.4 35.1 Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity 935 911 907 * 5.0 5.0 5.0 *

Limitation-affecting major

activity 2,533 2,345 2,325 208 13.5 12.9 12.9 28.5

i~oPdefinitiOns andtisou8si0n 8eopnge 2 and Appendix~.

NOTfV Foroffioial population estimates formoregener?.1 use, see Bureau of the Cens.s reports ontie.ivilian popul.tio. of fi. uni~dsf=tis, inCurr.ntPop.Mien Reporti Se­

rian P-!20, P45, mdP-6&md Bureau of Labr Sktistics montily repr\Employment and Famings.

17

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Table 6. Number and percent distribution of famales in the labor force, b limitation of activity according to age and em­

ployment statusl: United States, July 1Z61-June 1962

@rItd arebs.wdon household int,srviews ofMe civilian, noninstitntiona! ppulation. Thesurvey design, gememlq.alifioations, �ndinformation.. themdiabiNty oftbeeatimttns .,.

given inAppendix I. Definitions oftarms aregiven inAppendix~]

Age and limitation Current ly

of activity un­

employed

All ages-17+ years Number of females in the labor force

in thousands Percent distribution

All persons--- 24,645 23,316 23,109 1,536 _ 100.0 100.0

100.0

Persons with no chronic con-

ditions--- 11,497 10,888 10,810 686 46.7 46.7 46.8 44.7 Persona with 1+ chronic con-

ditions 13,148 12,42S 12,298 850 53.4 53.3 53.2 55.3

No limitation of activity--- 10,863 10,326 10,240 622 44.1 44.3 44.3 40.5 Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity 960 888 862 98 3.9 3.8 3.7 6.4

Limitation-affecting msj or

activity--- 1,326 1,214 1,196 130 5.4 5.2 5.2 8.5

1.7-24years

All persona--- 4,816 4,301 4,245 570 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Persona with no chronic con-

ditions--- 3,032 2,731 2,702 330 63.0 63.5 63.7 57.9

Perams with 1+ chronic con-

ditions 1,784 1,570 1,543 240 37.0 36.5 36.3 42.1

No limitation of activity 1,579 1,405 1,383 196 32.8 32.7 32.6 34.4

Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity 98 81 76 * 2.0 1.9 1.8 *

Limitation-affecting msjor

activity 107 84 84 * 2.2 2.0 2.0 *

25-44 yeara

All persons 10,142 9,645 9,565 576 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Persons with no chronic con­

ditions 4,888 4,676 4,645 243 48.2 48.5 48.6 42,2

Persons with 1+ chronic ccm­

ditions 5,254 4,969 4,921 333 51.8 51.5 51.4 57.8

No limitation of activity--- 4,509 4,286 4,252 257 44.5 44.4 44.5 44.6

Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity--- 318 293 288 * 3.1 3.0 3.0 *

Limitation-affecting msj or

activity--- 426 389 381 46 4.2 4.0 4.0 8.0

45+ yeara

All persons--- 9,688 9,370 9,298 390 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Persona with no chronic con-

ditions--- 3,578 3,481 3,464 114 36.9 37.2 37.3 29.2

Peraona with 1+ chronic con-

ditions--- 6,110 5,889 5,s34 277 63.1 62.8 62.7 71.0

No limitation of activity--- 4,775 4,635 4,605 170 49.3 49.5 49.5 43,6

Limitation-but not affect-

ing major activity--- 543 514 498 45 5.6 5.5 5.4 11.5

Limitation-affecting major

activity 793 741 731 62 8.2 7.9 7.9 15.9

anddiscussion IL

lFordefinitions seepage2 andAppendix

NOTE: Foroffioid population aatimates moregenemluse,seeBUIWI for of tbe C@mJs reprta on &e civilian population of the llnibd Statss, iU Current Population Reporm:Sa­

riea P-%1, P-25,andP.6G andBureau ofLabarStatistics monthly q-art, Employmentand Erurings.

18

---

---

------ ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

------- ---

---

---

---

-------

--- ---

---

---

Table 7. Number of restricted-activitydays and number of restricted-activitydays per person per year, by limitation of activity, age, and employment statual: United States, July 1961-June 1962

on household

@ataam b.sed ink-views of the civilian, noninstitutional population. The survey design, general qualifications, and information on tie reliability of the estimxtas me given in Appendix”I. Definitions of terms are ,&;en in Appendix Id

Age and limitation of activity

““r k=-i==d=

““r t=i-==1==

All agea-17+ years All persons

Peraon8 with no chronic con­

ditions

P~i~er~~~with1+ chronic con-

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting mejor

activity

17-24 years All persona

Persons with no chronic con­

ditions

Peraona with 1+ chronic con­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting pajor

activity

25-44 yeara All persons

Persona with no chronic con­

ditions

P~;er;awith 1+ chronic con-

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting msjor

activity

45+ years All persona

P&L~i;;awith no chronic con-

Persona with 1+ chronic con­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitatio+ut not affect­

ing mejor activity Limitation-affecting mejor

activity

Number of restricted-activitydaya Number of restricted-activitydays

in thousands per person per year

874,494 816,309 796,130 78,364 12.3 12.0 11.7 21.6

151,411 143,041 141,354 10,057 4.4 4.4 4.3 5.8

723,083 673,268 654,776 68,307 19.5 19.0 18.6 36.4 346,342 330,184 322,307 24,035 11.8 11.7 11.5 18.9

96,261 90,918 88,192 8,069 37.7 37.3 36.7 53.1

2S0,480 252,167 244,277 36,203 54.0 52.7 51.6 79.7

87,410 76,512 75,723 11,686 7.6 7,3 7,3 9.8

27,217 25,090 24,937 2,280 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.0

60,193 51,422 50,787 9,406 15.2 14.5 14.5 21.7

43,024 36,939 36,463 6,562 12.4 11.8 11.8 18.0

5,739 5,498 5,340 * 31.2 34.6 34.7 *

11,430 8,985 8,985 2,445 38.6 35.0 35.0 62.7

343,243 323,145 315,265 27,979 10.9 10.7 10.5 21.4

75,936 71,965 71,362 4,574 4.8 4.7 4.7 7.2

267,307 251,180 243,903 23,405 17.3 16.9 16.5 34.8 157,429 151,391 147,626 9,803 12.1 12.0 11.8 20.5

32,123 30,243 29,955 2,168 36.0 35.4 35.5 44.2

77,755 69,547 66,321 11,434 49.6 48.2 46.6 78.9

443,841 416,652 405,142 38,699 15.6 15.1 14.8 34.6

48,259 45,985 45,056 3,203 4.5 4.4 4.3 9.2

395,582 370,666 360,086 35,496 22.4 21.7 21.3 46,2 145,888 141,854 138,218 7,670 11.3 11.3 11.1 18.0

58,399 55,177 52,897 5,502 39.5 38.7 37.6 75.4

191,295 173,635 168,971 22,324 57.5 56.3 55.3 83.0

l~or definitions anddic.oumion see page 9 andAppendixfI.

19

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

---

---

--- ---

---

Table 8. Number of restricted-activity daya and number of restricted-activity days per ~ per year, by limitation of ac­

tivity, age, and employment status 1: United States, July 1961-June 1962

arebased on household interviews of the civilian, pqmlation. oftieestimatas

I%ata noninstitutional TheSUW.Y desk g.n.rd q.difi.ati.n% and i. f.rm.tion on the reliatiliLy are given inAppendix I. Definitions of tam aregiven inAppendixII

Age and limitation of activity

All ages-17+ years All persona

Persons with no chronic con­

ditions

Persons with 1+ chronic con­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting msjm

activity

17-24 years All persons

Persons with no chronic con­

ditions

Peraons with 1+ chronic con­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting. msj or

activity

25-44 years All persona

Persons with np chronic con­

ditions

Peraons with 1+ chronic con­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting major

activity--- 45+ years

All persons

Persona with no chronic con­

ditions

Persons with 1+ chronic cc.n­

ditions

No limitation of activity Limitation-but not affect­

ing major activity Limitation-affecting major

activity---

Currently employed

Total Currently

Ln labor

force Old New emp%~ed

definition definition

Number of restricted-activitydays Number of restricted-activity days

in thcmaanda per male per year

535,984 503,624 493,542 42,442 11.5 11.2 11.1 20.4

93,218 89,018 87,897 5,321 4.1 4.1 4.0 5.0

442,766 414,605 405,645 37,122 18.5 18.0 17.7 36.3 194,152 187,557 184,399 9,753 10.5 10.5 10.4 15.1

48,530 46,811 46,040 2,490 30.4 30.2 29.9 46.1

200,085 180,237 175,205 24,879 51.8 50.5 49.5 76.8

43,299 37,943 37,789 5,510 6.5 6.2 6.2 8.8

15,004 14,452 14,299 705 3.3 3.5 3.5 1.6

28,295 23,490 23,490 4,805 13.1 11.9 11.9 24.8

18,837 15,178 15,178 3,660 10.0 8.8 8.8 21.5

3,379 3,379 3,379 * 39.8 43.3 43.3 *

6>079 4,934 4,934 * 32.2 28.5 28.5 *

199,357 189,342 186,308 13,049 9.% 9.2 9.1 17.8

48,290 45,620 45,509 2,781 4.4 4.3 4.3 7.1

151,067 143,722 140,798 10,268 14.8 14.5 14.3 30,3

88,083 86,320 85,496 2,587 10.A 10.4 10.4 11.7

15,973 15,447 15,233 * 27.9 27.5 27.4 *

47,010 41,955 40,070 6,941 41.2 39.8 38.5 69.4

293,328 276,339 269,445 23,883 15.6 15.2 14.9 32.8

29,924 28,946 28,089 1,835 4.1 4.1 4.0 7.7

263,404 247,393 241,356 22,048 22.8 22.2 21.8 44.8

87,231 86,059 83,725 3,506 10.8 10.9 10.7 13.7

29,17S 27,9S6 27,429 * 31.2 30.7 30.2 *

146,995 133,348 130,202 16,793 58.0 56.9 56.0 80.7

l~or definiti~na and discussion seepage2 andAppendix~.

20